Goodison Conversations

I had an exciting time at Goodison Park yesterday: a potential 0-1 defeat turned to a 2-1 victory in injury time as Everton beat Tottenham Hotspur (my childhood team). The roar of the crowd was deafening! I was particularly pleased as 1) we badly needed a win after a succession of draws and 2) I had predicted the scoreline!

There were several good conversations with my hosts. 2 subjects predominated: why was the CofE not ordaining women as bishops (incomprehensible to the non-church world)? And what about gay marriage? I suspect David Cameron may be making a serious error of judgment if he thinks this is a vote-winner among the general population. Deep down, I think many people just feel 'this is just not right'.

For myself, I think we have to start with the fundamental assertion that all are created equal under God. To Paul's list of those between whom there is no difference before the Lord (Galatians 3.28), we might add 'gay or straight'. However uncomfortable those of us who are heterosexual might feel, however uncomprehending we might be towards gay people, the fact is God judges them the same way as everyone else. So I have no problem in principle with the legal protection, the affirmation and even the blessing of a gay civil partnership. It seems to me that in a broken world where so many relationships seem fragile and temporary, Christians of all people should want to celebrate any committed, faithful, lifelong relationship. But only in the way appropriate to that situation.

I believe that marriage (that is, a faithful, exclusive and lifelong relationship between one man and one woman) is a creation ordinance, something that is part of the very DNA of human society which must be protected at all costs. Simply changing the legal definition, as the Government proposes, will not alter that fundamental truth. Not only is marriage life-giving - in every sense of that word, not just in the sense of procreation - it symbolises the complementarity of the sexes upon which human society depends.

It is interesting that even some gay people see no need for a change in the law to allow them to marry. I would have thought that, in these days when celebrating difference and valuing diversity has become something of a rallying cry, gay people would rejoice to create their own institution different from marriage. Perhaps the problem is that no one can think of another word to describe that state? Civil partnership doesn't quite do it!

Although the proposed legislation is meant to be 'opt in' rather than 'opt out' (i.e. clergy would not have to marry gay people unless they chose to), you can see how this law would represent and lead to a serious culture change which would inevitably lead to clergy being expected to perform these ceremonies in due course. That would put many of us clergy in a quite impossible position.